Now that attention has turned from Miley to the civil war in Syria, people everywhere are wondering: Should America intervene?
The cause for intervention, of course, stems from August 21, when Syrian President al-Assad allegedly used chemical weapons against rebel forces, leading to the death of over 1,400 people including several hundred children. (Evidence that al-Assad is responsible is still inconclusive.) Should the U.S. intervene against Syria? Even though Obama is pushing hard in favor of an attack, the response from the American people has been an overwhelming “no.”
According to one poll, 7 out of 10 Americans are not in support of a military invasion, and Christians of all denominations (Catholics and Protestants) have been united against a military intervention. Even conservative Evangelicals, who in recent years have been the most eager for military intervention in the Middle East, are largely opposed to a U.S. backed invasion of Syria.
While I too join my Christian brothers and sisters in opposing a military intervention, I’ve been less than enthusiastic over some of the reasons people give for not intervening.
For instance, some say that America shouldn’t intervene because it wouldn’t advance American interests. Maybe it wouldn’t, but we are all made in God’s image and advancing the interests of one particular nation (possibly at the expense of people in other nations) doesn’t seem to vibe with a Christian worldview.
Or, we should not intervene because it would cost too much money. This is true, but I think we need to ask deeper questions. Let’s say that an invasion would cost 10 billion dollars and thousands of lives were spared, then we could morally argue that it was worth every penny. The question isn’t so much is it expensive, but will intervention accomplish peace? More specifically: should Christians support the use of violence to confront evil?
I’ve already argued where I stand on this, so I won’t belabor the point. Another related question is: how will an intervention affect the kingdom of God in Syria? Christians need to think theologically and ecclesiologically—not just politically—about the potential western invasion of Syria.
Syria has a long, rich Christian tradition. Currently, an estimated 10-15% of the population are Christian—many of them are former Iraqis who fled to Syria after the U.S. invasion of Iraq (2003) nearly decimated the Christian church. If the U.S. does in Syria what it did in Iraq, it will most probably wreak havoc on our brothers and sisters, who will be killed, maimed, tortured, exiled, and raped. Even worse, if the U.S. helps topple the Syrian government, this will create a power vacuum that will most certainly be filled by Islam extremists, who will further propound the violence towards Christ’s bride in Syria.
Religious historian Philip Jenkins rightly concludes:
If the U.S., France, and some miscellaneous allies strike at the regime, they could conceivably so weaken it that it would collapse. Out of the ruins would emerge a radically anti-Western regime, which would kill or expel several million Christians and Alawites. This would be a political, religious, and humanitarian catastrophe unparalleled since the Armenian genocide almost exactly a century ago.
Even if a Western invasion was inexpensive, even if no Americans would lose their lives, even if it would hugely further American interests, and even if success was guaranteed, I would still oppose a military invasion. How could I support something that will rip apart the body of Christ?
But do we only care about Christians who are, or will, suffer? Shouldn’t we also care for the non-Christian people who are suffering?
Yes, absolutely. The global community should do something. But I don’t think that either a military strike or doing nothing are the only two options. Traditional just war theory teaches that war should be waged as a last resort; that is, after all other nonviolent means have been exhausted. Has America exhausted all those means?